Because they have all been tried before and had the opposite affect.
Anyone who likes them should make their own site to try and see. Oh wait, sangar already did that multiple times and it crashed and burned every time.
Anyone who likes them should make their own site to try and see. Oh wait, sangar already did that multiple times and it crashed and burned every time.
Did you even read the document? Claiming that Wikipedia has implemented all of these suggestions in the past is just plainly false. If you disagree with the documents contents, why don't you provide a substantive argument instead of just belittling efforts at changing the status quo?
I'm claiming people, not necessarily wikipedia, have tried them. However many have been tried by Wikipedia too.
> just belittling efforts at changing the status quo?
The status quo is pretty good. Change for change sake is an anti-pattern.
Regardless, i think people who like these ideas should try them, on their own site. I suspect they will quickly find out why Wikipedia does not want to do them.
After all, martin luther didnt just whine that the pope wouldnt listen to him, he made his own thing.
We are talking about at least 10 pages worth of proposed reforms. Do you have a specific one you would like to discuss? I'm not particularly interested in writing a 10 page essay in an hn comment about why i think all the proposed reforms are stupid.